Speed Cameras - You are not above the law no matter where you are caught!

Ronan H

Over the past few weeks since the new cameras have appeared on the M50 i have been looking at various threads here on Boards.ie, listening to radio stations, and driving on the M50 and i must say that i am bewildered and mightily pissed off at some of the attitudes that are being displayed by some people, typed, verbally and in practice, in relation to the above.

There seems to be a view held by a lot of people that the use of speed cameras, either fixed or mobile, in "easy target" areas such as the M50, stillorgan dual carriageway etc... are all instances of shooting fish in a barrel. There also seems to be a lot of people who feel hard done by when they are caught, or almost caught in these areas, just because they feel that these areas are easy targets, and that bewilders me immensely. Im not sure what goes on in some peoples heads but if you are caught speeding, AKA breaking the law, then you absolutely deserve to be caught and as for feeling hard done by? Tough sh*t, its totally irrelevant where you are caught speeding, what gives you the right to feel hard done by when you are caught breaking the law? Just because you feel that the road you are caught on is a - shooting fish in a barrel area - doesnt mean in any way that you deserve any more leniency in relation to speeding. You dont have the right to break the law, end of story...

FACT: A small percentage of serious road traffic accidents happen on motorways and dual carriageways.

Fair enough. Accepting the above fact as being true, i can see why people feel that putting cameras in these areas is shooting fish in a barrel, and also why people feel this is a money making racket. Also fair enough, but put aside the fact of the money for a moment, if the Gardaí are able to catch hundreds, even thousands of people on these roads, do you not think that that will be a few hundred more people who might have a better chance of getting the message about speeding? As i said earlier, its irrelevant where you are caught, the duallers are the same as the back roads in that respect, what on this earth gives you the right to be pissed off when you are caught speeding. I am quite sure that the people with these attitudes would be equally pissed off if they were caught on a minor road, so keep your ridiculous rationale to yourself and have a chat with yourself about what makes you think you deserve anything less than to be caught when you are speeding. To complain that the dualler is shooting fish in a barrel when you are caught is almost like saying "I expect to be treated differently than other people, i want to break the speed limit and get away with it...i cant believe the cheek of the law to catch me breaking the law, how dare they...". Typical a**hole attitude that is contributing to the ridiculous road deaths in this country.

As for the M50 cameras, if people stopped complaining for a minute to think, they would realise that its for SAFETY REASONS first and foremost that they were installed. Theres hundreds of people working within feet of the active roads and the lanes are narrower than usual in some places and also theres no hard shoulder to take evasive action in. So to complain about the cameras, which are there to keep you and others safe is showing a blatnt disregard for life. Some people in this country seem to have an inate opposition to the imposition of the traffic speed laws of this country and clearly dont give a sh*te about anyone except themselves, its NOT all about you, there are others in the world that matter too, not just yourself. YES the government or whoever will probably make a small fortune from the cameras on the M50 but its not the only way that money is being made in the country, you are only pissed off because it impinges on your aspirations to be above the law.

Now im sure that there are many people who would like to choke me for what i have said in this thread, and thats acceptable and predictable. I would be willing to bet that they would be the people i am speaking about in the first place. Having said that i am sure there are many people who will agree with me too, its just that the message boards seem to get clogged up with people complaining about the enforcement of the speeding laws. At the end of the day they are there to try and make the roads safer for everyone and stop our friends and relatives from being killed in RTA's.

One particular thread i read recently was talking about ways of detecting and outsmarting speed cameras with GPS systems, mobile phones etc... In that thread someone said that all these devices are used for "safety reasons" because speed cameras cause people to jam on and put others behind them at risk so you use your GPS etc... to detect the danger in advance. Boll**ks, people use them to avoid being caught speeding, they want to drive as fast as they want when they can and then slow down for cameras and then speed up again and resume breaking the law. ANyone who believes that these are primaily bought for the above safety reason is clearly deluded. Those people are in the absolute EDIT: minority (not majority).

Its a sad fact of this life, people want to speed and not get caught, simple as that, despite all the horrific deaths and adverts on TV and campaigns etc... it seldom makes a difference. That is very very sad indeed.

I think there should be FAR more speed cameras, but judging by the attitudes of some people in this country you would probably need to have them every 500 meters to make a difference, and even then im sure you would still find people with ridiculous attitudes who would still consider them selves above the law... Again, so sad...

I am just sick and tired of the whole situation, its so simple to just drive at the speed limits and get over it, so so simple...

Ill finish by referring to a thread where someone was complaining about a particular speed limit and saying that 10 - 15KMPH above the limit would be quite safe... That says it all, a blatant disregard for other peoples safety. Maybe its not much to you but i bet that 10KMPH would make a difference to a 10 year olds body if you hit them in your car driving at a speed YOU thought was safe!

End of rant for now, roll on the comments...

Rant Head

astraboy

Great, another thread about speed cameras. I'm not familar with the M50 or the cameras, but people do feel hard done by when there is a slight infraction of a speed limit. People, in general and myself included, have no problem with speed cameras used as a PART of the road safety strategy and used at locations that are dangerous. From my understanding the M50 cameras are there as there are roadworks ongoing and the reduction and enforcement of a speed limit is fair enough. People have issues with ridiclously low limits, on dual carriageways. Also, speed is relative. A speed camera will never catch a dangerous driver going under the limit, and in most cases such driving is far more dangerous then going over the limit. Speed limits are made up on a county or national basis and often do not reflect the conditions of the road, ie they are too high or low in cases.


Finally, speed detection is only one minor part in reducing road deaths. Driver training, more guards on the roads to catch dangerous drivers and improved road conditions combined with safer cars all have as much of a part to play in reducing road accidents. I think I have explained my point correctly, roll on the abuse, the slaggings and general pig headedness that usually accompanies such threads..........:p

Ronan H

astraboy wrote:

Great, another thread about speed cameras.

I think I have explained my point correctly, roll on the abuse, the slaggings and general pig headedness that usually accompanies such threads..........:p

I know there is a load of threads about Speed Cameras, i sat for a few minutes deliberating how to pitch it but it does my head in so much that i just had to post it :eek:. I do hereby swear never to make another new thread about speed cameras... :cool:.

As for the second part of the quote, im waiting for the onslaught after 6pm this evening, it will be messy :rolleyes:.

Thread Head

Keith C

So your not familiar with the M50 or the speed camera's yet it bugs you when people complain about getting caught speeding on M50. Easy option is

1/ Don't read any M50 threads

2/ Don't read any speeding threads

Save yourself getting stressed out

astraboy

The fact is mate that people on both sides of the debate have entrenched views. I may disagree with you on parts of your point but am willing to say that speed limits are important and have their place. What gets me is people believeing that speed limits and their enforcement alone will reduce the road deaths, when the issue is far more complex and there are many more faceuts to road safety. Like I said, speed is relative to the conditions, your car and the road you are on. Blanket speed limits are often too low on many roads and too high on others. If people were trained to drive at a safe speed then there would not be an issue. Case in point the many accidents a few weeks back in the fog when people did not adjust their speed for the conditions. Saying a particular speed is safe, and going mildly over it warrants a flogging is pure ignorance to the way speed limits are made IMO. A county council offical in a office decides a certain speed will be put in place in an area, often to do with planning considerations more then safety. This speed is then "OK" but anything over it makes you a horrible unwanted member of society.

D'ont get me wrong, I'm not condonig blitzing speed limits, I would just perfer if they made more sense in partricular areas. Also, if people in Ireland were better trained keeping to the speed limits would not be a problem. The amount of bad driving I have seen by people going 10KPH under the limit is crazy, yet a person safetly passing out a car, that chooses to go 10KPH over the limit to end the manover in a more efficient manner(ie spending less time on the right side of the road!) is the enemy. There is far too much generalization in such a debate and each situation is different.

Also, I think people have a problem with cameras replacing guardi on the roads. There is no substituate for actual policing IMO.

layke

Let me lay it out for you.

As you've said we don't have that many accidents on the M50. Yet we throw speed cams up all over it. Why? What would be the most likely reason? Safety? I think not, revenue seems more like it tbh.

Savman

Here we go again.

The M50 is, IIRC, 60km/hr nowadays cos the roadworks is that right? Bearing in mind its still 2 lanes of traffic each way. Take a trip out to Roscommon/Mayo, there's some deadly stretches of country road out there set at 80km/hr.

Yet the speed traps are on the M50. If anyone can explain that logic to me I'd be glad to listen, but its typical to the govt's so-so attitude to the issue.

Yes, if above the limit you are caught. But it is also shooting fish in a barrel. All we're asking is reasonable limits and balanced enforcement, which starts at the top.

astraboy

Savman wrote:

Here we go again.

The M50 is, IIRC, 60km/hr nowadays cos the roadworks is that right? Bearing in mind its still 2 lanes of traffic each way. Take a trip out to Roscommon/Mayo, there's some deadly stretches of country road out there set at 80km/hr.

Yet the speed traps are on the M50. If anyone can explain that logic to me I'd be glad to listen, but its typical to the govt's so-so attitude to the issue.

Yes, if above the limit you are caught. But it is also shooting fish in a barrel. All we're asking is reasonable limits and balanced enforcement, which starts at the top.

Gotta agree here man.

Ronan H

astraboy wrote:

Saying a particular speed is safe, and going mildly over it warrants a flogging is pure ignorance to the way speed limits are made IMO.

It does warrant a flogging (as such) if someone goes above a speed limit by a few KMs if that few KMs is difference between someone being dead or alive after an impact. That aspect is very much part of the decision making progress in relating to setting speed limits... There was a brilliant advert on TV a while back that illustrated this...

My main point is about peoples attitudes more than anything else, not specific ways of catching people etc... I know i did refer to being in favour of more cameras at the end of my OP but for the most part its peoples attitudes that need to change in relation to speeding, and unless that changes then theres very little hope for improvement...

People are already jumping on the "money making scam" bandwagon in relation to the M50 cameras, SO WHAT if they generate money. They are also catching people who break the law, isnt that worthwhile? It might make them think twice about speeding on other roads in the future...

And yes the M50 is still 2 lanes, but crucially without a hard shoulder (which gives people a better chance of avoiding an accident) and inches away from workmen, i cant see how people can say thats not a safety issue in relation to the speed limits and the cameras... Granted i slammed the safety issue in relation to GPS systems to detect cameras but i think everyone knows that safety is not the paramount reason why people invest in these systems...

Attitude Head

Gatster

Cracking, another high horse speeding thread.

it impinges on your aspirations to be above the law

and

and even then im sure you would still find people with ridiculous attitudes who would still consider them selves above the law... Again, so sad...

Are you telepathic, as you seem to know what other people want or desire :rolleyes: ?
Sometimes I speed, most of the time I don't, I don't think I'm Judge Dredd

Ronan H

Gatster wrote:

Are you telepathic, as you seem to know what other people want or desire :rolleyes: ?
Sometimes I speed, most of the time I don't, I don't think I'm Judge Dredd

No im not telepathic but i have seen enough carnage on the roads and heard enough from people to know that there are definitely individuals who feel that they are above the law, and i think that is bad.

Not Telepathic Head

Savman

Head wrote:

etc etc etc

You're really wasting your time with this IMHO, it's been done to death (scuse the pun:o) and you'll just give yourself a headache.
If it makes you happy to stay under the limit then fair play, you'll never get a speeding fine. But from what I've seen the very people who hold up right lane traffic on motorways and dual carriageways because of their holier-than-thou attitude to speeding, are the very same morons who happily ignore the 50km/hr limit in residential areas. Go figure

Keith C

Head wrote:

It does warrant a flogging (as such) if someone goes above a speed limit by a few KMs if that few KMs is difference between someone being dead or alive after an impact. That aspect is very much part of the decision making progress in relating to setting speed limits... There was a brilliant advert on TV a while back that illustrated this...

My main point is about peoples attitudes more than anything else, not specific ways of catching people etc... I know i did refer to being in favour of more cameras at the end of my OP but for the most part its peoples attitudes that need to change in relation to speeding, and unless that changes then theres very little hope for improvement...

People are already jumping on the "money making scam" bandwagon in relation to the M50 cameras, SO WHAT if they generate money. They are also catching people who break the law, isnt that worthwhile? It might make them think twice about speeding on other roads in the future...

And yes the M50 is still 2 lanes, but crucially without a hard shoulder (which gives people a better chance of avoiding an accident) and inches away from workmen, i cant see how people can say thats not a safety issue in relation to the speed limits and the cameras... Granted i slammed the safety issue in relation to GPS systems to detect cameras but i think everyone knows that safety is not the paramount reason why people invest in these systems...

Attitude Head

Load of crap, camera's on the M50 do not save lives as M50 is not a deathtrap. Look at that new speeding ad with the bloke & girlfriend at the wall (after 9pm watershed). This accident is someone overtaking at speed on a COUNTRY road, not the M50 or any dual carraigeway/motorwat. Even the RSA who made this ad & are always highlighting the dangers of speeding are pointing out that it is country roads where this causes death.
So why arent more cameras put on rural roads?? simple, govt makes more money where the highest traffic numbers are, not where the highest deaths are.

omega man

Head wrote:

One particular thread i read recently was talking about ways of detecting and outsmarting speed cameras with GPS systems, mobile phones etc... In that thread someone said that all these devices are used for "safety reasons" because speed cameras cause people to jam on and put others behind them at risk so you use your GPS etc... to detect the danger in advance. Boll**ks, people use them to avoid being caught speeding, they want to drive as fast as they want when they can and then slow down for cameras and then speed up again and resume breaking the law. ANyone who believes that these are primaily bought for the above safety reason is clearly deluded. Those people are in the absolute majority.

Why then are speed camera detection devices etc legal over in the UK? Surely the point of the speed camera is to slow cars down and not to catch them in the act so detecting or warning devices will have the same effect and ensure people slow down in advance of the high risk area, job done.

Alun

omega man wrote:

Why then are speed camera detection devices etc legal over in the UK?

They won't be for long. There's legislation currently going through parliament that will outlaw these. GPS based devices to warn of fixed cameras will remain legal though.

Seth Brundle

Keith C wrote:

Load of crap, camera's on the M50 do not save lives as M50 is not a deathtrap.

I actually agree with the two new cameras on the M50.
Prior to their introduction there was very little heed paid to the speed limit (I will even put my own hand up there!). Apparently some drivers were waaay over 120km/h never mind 60km/h!
However, the workers on the other side of the armco do have the right to work in a relatively safe environment. Fair enough they are not there at night to the same extent that they are during daytime but they are there!
Furthermore, to those who suggest that the limits could be upped at off-peak hours - the driving lane is in a fairly poor condition and not suitable for the speeds that many would like to try doing!

galwaytt

Alun wrote:

GPS based devices to warn of fixed cameras will remain legal though.

...yep, and now that you can have it in your phone, that battle is already over..........

OP - I'll (try) and overlook the hyper-ventilating come-all-ye about speed cameras. I know, you know, and the Garda know, they are for revenue. End of story. It's taken a while, but at least in the UK, that's all about to change, as the local authorities are no longer allowed to keep the fines.........you just watch the local authorities lose interest in the subject once there's no more money in them........

I will agree though, that the reason for all the temp ones, is worker safety, and in that respect, I have no issue. Dressing it up as something else, I do have a problem with.......

Oh, and why was that 10 yr old child on the motorway, anyway? Where's his/her mother ??

Ronan H

galwaytt wrote:

I will agree though, that the reason for all the temp ones, is worker safety, and in that respect, I have no issue. Dressing it up as something else, I do have a problem with.......

Oh, and why was that 10 yr old child on the motorway, anyway? Where's his/her mother ??

Well said, its quite obviously for safety reasons. As well as the fact (that everyone seems to be ignoring in their rants about money making) that theres no hard shoulder, and thats for DRIVER safety, yes that would be the government looking out for us, shock horror... I bet that if there was no monetary fine for speeding and just penalty points people would still be complaining.

Not sure about that 10 year old though, i think her parents went bombing off at 61KMPH .

Monetary Head

Stark

I think astraboy's post sums it up best.

I'm definitely for speed cameras where they're needed. (Including the current M50 ones by the roadworks even). I was also delighted to see the gardaí moved their speed check from the soft target 60kph zone on the Finglas Road of just after the Jamestown Road roundabout, to further on down the road with the traffic lights and built-up areas, where the limit is still 60kph but you really wouldn't want to be going anywhere above that. You see maniacal ***** racing down there all the time.

I don't approve of the "that area has a very low accident rate, but lots of people going fast so let's put cameras there and kaching kaching" approach to placement though.

Ronan H

Keith C wrote:

Load of crap, camera's on the M50 do not save lives as M50 is not a deathtrap. Look at that new speeding ad with the bloke & girlfriend at the wall (after 9pm watershed). This accident is someone overtaking at speed on a COUNTRY road, not the M50 or any dual carraigeway/motorwat. Even the RSA who made this ad & are always highlighting the dangers of speeding are pointing out that it is country roads where this causes death.
So why arent more cameras put on rural roads?? simple, govt makes more money where the highest traffic numbers are, not where the highest deaths are.

Yes the government makes more money but also more people are caught, thus hopefully getting across the message to more people... Speeding is speeding, as i have said a million times...

I totally agree that there should be more cameras on rural roads, but the fact of the matter is that there isnt, and we have to put up with what we have currently...

We all know the M50 (as per OP) is not a deathtrap but with all the action on it currently if the limit still was 120KMPH there would be carnage IF there was an accident, transfer the accident near loughlinstown a few weeks ago to a section of the M50 with roadworks and you would have had a disaster... They dont happen often on the M50 but why not minimise the extent of a prospective accident by having a reduced speed limit while roadworks are in place...

Currently Head

*** Quite apt signature by the way Stark:

It's all fun and games until someone loses a kid

Head

Jimoslimos

A point the OP misses is that speed cameras are next to useless in catching the scumbag speeding with a stolen/uninsured/untaxed car. Therefore for the most part untraceable and guess what.......above the law:rolleyes: astraboy hit the nail on the head when he said there was no substitute for actual policing

Stark

Head wrote:

Yes the government makes more money but also more people are caught, thus hopefully getting across the message to more people... Speeding is speeding, as i have said a million times...

The idea that "making an example of" speeders in high traffic areas will affect the habits of drivers throughout the country is a total fallacy. You only have to take a trip up North to see how ineffective their speed camera network is in getting people in general to slow down. They're just as ineffective in mainland UK and in fact have made things worse as they've been used as substitutes of actual traffic police instead of as an aid.

tabatha

the m50 is a death trap at the moment, are people blind? there are workmen working inches away from cars doing well over the 60km limit. has anyone notices the amount of pot holes on these roads from the road works that are happening. has anyone else noticed the amount of lorries since the ban in the city? let face it, the m50 (where the road works are) is not a safe road at the moment. how many of you would work on the side of a road like that with traffic sometimes going over 100km by you? the issue here is saftey. saftey of the workmen and safty of other drivers. have a bit of respect.

Ronan H

Jimoslimos wrote:

astraboy hit the nail on the head when he said there was no substitute for actual policing

Im genuinely not being smart when i ask what do people mean in reference to "actual policing"? Do ya mean people out with mobile cameras or is it a more general policing thing in relation to wider aspects of motoring?

Also educating people has been mentioned a few times, this would be a huge benefit to all involved, its criminal that there is not better education in the area considering all the carnage around the place...

Education Head

Stark

Head wrote:

Im genuinely not being smart when i ask what do people mean in reference to "actual policing"? Do ya mean people out with mobile cameras or is it a more general policing thing in relation to wider aspects of motoring

People do all kinds of crazy **** while staying within the speed limit. None of which can be caught by a camera. Speed may make an accident worse, but it's bad driving that causes the accident in the first place. I'd rather be on a road with an enforced maximum speed of 200kph* and good drivers than one with an enforced maximum speed of 60kph and bad drivers.

*Logic being that the good drivers will probably stick to 60kph when appropriate anyway.

impr0v

Savman wrote:

The M50 is, IIRC, 60km/hr nowadays cos the roadworks is that right? Bearing in mind its still 2 lanes of traffic each way. Take a trip out to Roscommon/Mayo, there's some deadly stretches of country road out there set at 80km/hr.

Yet the speed traps are on the M50. If anyone can explain that logic to me I'd be glad to listen, but its typical to the govt's so-so attitude to the issue.

I'll have a go.

Firstly, as you are no doubt aware, the 80 kph limit is not applied to those country road stretches indvidually, it's a blanket limit based upon road classification. This is a pragmatic approach which takes cognisance of the fact that to individually assess each road in the country and implement the necessary bye-laws to apply a suitable limit to them would occupy the road design offices of the various local authorities for the next decade or so. It's a compromise and, as a result, sure there are roads out there which aren't suitable for an 80 kph limit, like the boreens which are the width of one car (should have lower limits applied), and the sections of old national primary which have been bypassed and escaped regional road classification (should have higher limits applied) but, as is oft stated, it is a maximum speed limit, not a recommendation of what speed to travel the road at.

Many of the roads in question, and I'll return to the example of the bog boreen type scenarion, aren't heavily trafficed, and when they are, the majority of traffic using them is locally sourced and is familiar with the road. This, and other similar factors, means that generally the roads are comparitively low risk and makes the compromise outlined above tenable.

There are undoubtedly many exceptions to the above, but looking at the issue nationally, I think it's a fair assessment.

The 60 kph limit has been imposed on the M50 due to the works. It's a standard occurance at roadworks around the country and, apart from traffic safety consideration, it is likely to be tied into insurance, health and safety, and legal considerations for the contractor.

However, in contrast to the majority of situations, on the M50 they are being enforced. Usually a contractor, or the local authority, doesn't go through the red tape involved in implementing a special speed limit, as the time and work involved isn't worth it for works that will be of short duration, and in relatively low traffic conditions.

The works on the M50 obviously don't qualify under either of the above categories; the works will last for a number of years, and it's the most heavily trafficed road in the country, and indeed one of the most heavily trafficed in Europe for a two lane road (2x2).

A condition of the contract was that both lanes would have to be maintained in operation for the duration of the works. For works as complex as those underway, and in such a constricted site, it's impossible to completely isolate construction traffic from live traffic, which leads to situations such as the right hand lane merging of loaded trucks with live traffic, roads-sweepers mingling with live traffic, etc. that can be observed on the site. It would be untenable to have a limit above 60kph in situations such as this.

Given the importance of the M50 artery to the city, by extension to the economy of the country and, in one further leap, politically, it's vitally important that traffic on the road be kept moving as much as possible. Again, given the contricted conditions in which traffic is now operating, i.e. the absense of hard shoulders, the narrow width of the lanes, etc. one crash can paralyse the road. If this crash occurs at 30kph or under, as the majority do at the moment, it's a big problem, but it's relatively easily cleared. If it occurs at higher speeds, there's a very high potential for multiple vehicles being involved, carriageway closures and, as a result, city-wide traffic meltdown. One such event has an almost measurable economic cost, and a very high real cost to thousands of commuters who don't get home, or to work if its the morning, for an extra hour or two. There is also the potential for large crashes to encroach upon the site and be fatal or injurious to workers.

It is therefore crucial that if the limits aren't being observed, that they be enforced. Much more crucial, in terms of the greater good, than carrying out speed traps on dangerous sections of road in Roscommon or Mayo.

I believe that the fact that the cameras were only introduced recently is indicative of the fact that the government were hesitant to do so originally, for fear of the 'fish in a barrell' arguments. I think their preference would be to enforce the limits only during site working and peak traffic hours. However to do this would require roadside traps and pulling cars over, a situation which would only exacerbate the already atrocious traffic conditions during those times. Cameras are therefore the most viable solution.

Alun

Head wrote:

Im genuinely not being smart when i ask what do people mean in reference to "actual policing"? Do ya mean people out with mobile cameras or is it a more general policing thing in relation to wider aspects of motoring?

The latter, obviously.

The fact that on practically every journey I make by car, regardless of distance or duration, I see at least one example of stupid, reckless, idiotic driver behaviour, means that a single undercover traffic corps car could catch a dozen or more a day with no trouble at all. And, as others, have pointed out, these people are rarely 'speeding', usually the exact opposite in fact.

Ronan H

Bravo impr0v, a tremendously well thought out and written post. I still cannot understand how people can deny that the 60KMPH limit being for safety reasons though. Hopefully after your informative post it will be without argument...

@ Alun: Speaking of which, undercover cars that is. I have noticed quite a few pull-ins of that nature in the past couple of months, particularly on the more southern parts of the motorway! Long may it last...

South Head

omega man

Head wrote:

Bravo impr0v, a tremendously well thought out and written post. I still cannot understand how people can deny that the 60KMPH limit being for safety reasons though. Hopefully after your informative post it will be without argument...

@ Alun: Speaking of which, undercover cars that is. I have noticed quite a few pull-ins of that nature in the past couple of months, particularly on the more southern parts of the motorway! Long may it last...

South Head

I dont think many people will argue against those temp m50 cameras but i cant understand why the real black spots are ignored. I lived in meath for a couple of years and my drive to and from work at dublin airport over those years saw garda speed checks on the n3 (dual) and gatso's on the m1 approaching the airport! I drive a lot and seem to only see checks/camera's on quality road systems while cars do ridiculous speeds on country back roads with no chance of being caught except by the reaper himself! Also i dislike people with high and mighty attitudes as i can 100% guarantee that everyone will exceed a speed limit at some stage in their lives.

Marcus.Aurelius

Bad roads are ignored, back roads are 80 kph, N4 is 80 kph, a fine dual-carraigeway. I'm with astraboy. Money racket.

Ronan H

omega man wrote:

Also i dislike people with high and mighty attitudes as i can 100% guarantee that everyone will exceed a speed limit at some stage in their lives.

If that is directed at me... Yes i have exceeded the speed limits in my life, but i dont now and i that makes a difference to my safety and that safety of my wife and my baby when they are in my car. Also if i crash into someone i hopefully wont do as much damage as i would have at a time when i did exceed the speed limits... If that gives me a high and mighty attitude then so be it.

Theres no point dwelling on if a person used to speed or not in the past, its what people are doing now to improve road safety that matters.

Mighty Head

Marcus.Aurelius

Head wrote:

If that is directed at me... Yes i have exceeded the speed limits in my life, but i dont now and i that makes a difference to my safety and that safety of my wife and my baby when they are in my car. Also if i crash into someone i hopefully wont do as much damage as i would have at a time when i did exceed the speed limits... If that gives me a high and mighty attitude then so be it.

Mighty Head

Of course it does. :rolleyes: Some people are better off at the speed limit. Do you let other cars pass you where you have sufficient room in which to allow them?

EDIT: its admirable that you drive carefully, but do you drive well and with courtesy to other drivers, that's way more important than doddling along at the limit blocking other cars.

omega man

Head wrote:

If that is directed at me... Yes i have exceeded the speed limits in my life, but i dont now and i that makes a difference to my safety and that safety of my wife and my baby when they are in my car. Also if i crash into someone i hopefully wont do as much damage as i would have at a time when i did exceed the speed limits... If that gives me a high and mighty attitude then so be it.

Theres no point dwelling on if a person used to speed or not in the past, its what people are doing now to improve road safety that matters.

Mighty Head

With all due respect i very much doubt you obey ALL speed limits ALL of the time. I often attempt to keep under in 50KM zones but find it almost impossible as the cars really start to back up behind and then the overtaking procession begins. My wife is the ultimate captain slow but even she will go over the 50/60 limits by 5-10 kmh the odd time. I sometimes think the slogan "speed kills" is a bit too general of a statement, its dangerous excessive speed with poor driving skills that do it really.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Savman wrote:

If it makes you happy to stay under the limit then fair play, you'll never get a speeding fine. But from what I've seen the very people who hold up right lane traffic on motorways and dual carriageways because of their holier-than-thou attitude to speeding, are the very same morons who happily ignore the 50km/hr limit in residential areas. Go figure

Don't confuse people who keep to the speed limit with the tossers who hold up the right hand lanes. If we're keeping to the speed limit we're not holding up any traffic (Not that personally I can see why anybody would want to sit in the right hand lane) And anybody with a positive attitude to speed limits will not then ignore a 50KMH area.


Well said Head. I wish you luck with the tirade this evening and tonight.

ambro25

There's a new type of speed camera currently making great strides in the UK, which makes everyone obey the limit over even extended stretches of motorway: the speed averaging camera.

Garanteed to stop any speed merchants of any ilk (except thieves of course).

Can't understand why they didn't use that type on the M50, as it is an absolute best-fit for the conditions and the purpose... oh, wait... [slaps head]they cost more and they gross less revenue [/slaps head], duh-me!

That's all for now

Ronan H

maoleary wrote:

Do you let other cars pass you where you have sufficient room in which to allow them?

EDIT: its admirable that you drive carefully, but do you drive well and with courtesy to other drivers, that's way more important than doddling along at the limit blocking other cars.

Its not so much a case of me "allowing" people to pass as such. I drive at the speed limits and people pass me when they feel like passing me, whether its on a big straight stretch of straight empty road or on a small twisty road. When they decide to pass is their decision. If i am driving on a road with a 60KMPH speed limit and someone wants to pass then so be it, but im absolutely not going to pull into a hard shoulder to facilitate someone breaking the speed limit. I have a right to drive at the speed limit and if people behind me dont like that then thats not my problem. So when you say "let other cars pass", if you mean pulling into the hard shoulder then NO, unless they are being very wreckless and causing a danger to me, then i would out of common sense but in general i wont pull off the road to let people pass if thats what you mean? If its a big road and the lane is very wide i will drive towards the inside of the lane so as not to hog the whole lane. On the M50 its painful in the extreme to have to drive at 60KMPH for 5 miles but i still do it and i stay in the left lane unless the right hand lane is moving faster which seems to happen occasionally.

And yes i do drive well and with courtesy to others, courtesy to others as i see it though, you might have a different idea of what that is? As for doddling along at the limit, i disagree withyou using that phrase, im not doddling, im simply driving at the speed limit. Its there for a reason and as i said above i have an obligation by law to drive at the speed limit so thats what i do. What goes on behind me is not my problem, if people want to pass they will but i wont facilitate it just because they dont want to obey the speed limit. Actually now that i type more i think that your doddling comment is wrong and unfair to be honest, you shouldnt label driving at the speed limit as doddling and blocking other cars. If that was the case then why would there be any speed limits at all :mad:. The speed limits are there for a reason so to label someone who obeys them as doddling is definitely not a fair comment.

omega man wrote:

With all due respect i very much doubt you obey ALL speed limits ALL of the time. I often attempt to keep under in 50KM zones but find it almost impossible as the cars really start to back up behind and then the overtaking procession begins. My wife is the ultimate captain slow but even she will go over the 50/60 limits by 5-10 kmh the odd time. I sometimes think the slogan "speed kills" is a bit too general of a statement, its dangerous excessive speed with poor driving skills that do it really.

Actually omega man i would say that 95% of the time i do obey ALL the speed limits, much as it pains me sometimes. The times that i dont would probably be if i lose concentration momentarily and drift above it occasionally, in particular on the M50 as its such a painful 5 mile strip at 60KMPH, nobodys perfect, but i do make a good effort. I dont see why thats so hard to believe / accept / whatever...

As you said yourself it is very difficult to drive at 50KMPH when theres a line of traffic behind you, and it has taken me a few months to be dilligent enough to stick at 50KMPH regardless of whats going on behind me. I used to worry about other people behind me and thats when i found it hard to stick to the limits, but i have got over that and now its no bother, and i feel better for it despite the abuse i get from people occasionally. Feck the people behind you, you cant be expected to break the law just to please others and you shouldnt be expected to, again that goes back to peoples bad attitudes and driving habits. An example being maoleary with the doddling comment, just because i drive at the speed limit. This sort of attitude just baffles me. Whats the big deal with just obeying the bloody speed limit... Granted some of them are a bit ridiculous, but as i said in an earlier post, its the best we got for now so we have no choice. Its not up to the average road user to decide on the speed limits so unless they are changed we cant do anything about it...

Not Doddling Head

Ronan H

ambro25 wrote:

oh, wait... [slaps head]they cost more and they gross less revenue [/slaps head], duh-me!

What did i do to deserve a slap?

Slap Head (trying to inject a bit of humour into the thread before he is lynched for obeying the speed limit )

astraboy

What I ment by actual policing head was basically cops on the road. I have no bother with the resources needed being pumped into getting guards out onto the roads in both marked and unmarked vehicles. The cops can then follow someone over the course of a mile or two and look at their driving style, they may warrant a warning, or if they are a complete muppet a court apperance for dangerous driving. Bear in mind that a speed camera(gasto style ones anyway) takes a snapshot of your car going over the limit at one point in time. It does not:

1. Check if your car is stolen
2. Check if your car is roadworthy(not just NCT BTW)
3. check if your car is taxed
4. check if your are weaving in and out of lanes, being agressive causing obstruction of the overtaking lane, to name but a few offences/annoyances.

Basically, speed cameras and enforcement with them have a VERY limited place on our roads. If you are a clown under the limit they are stone useless. A cop on the road on the other hand can use a great human trait, not featured on speed cameras, known as judgement.

Final point of the night:

My sister is in transition year in school. She had to take religious studies as an exam for her Junior cert, and also gets some form of sex education in school this year. Why are the kids, at the ages of 14/15/16 not being thought some road safety, or even proper drivers education? In fairness it would make a massive difference over a few years when these people start out on the road. However, we are stuck with quick fixes like speed cameras that look good on a press release. "Yes we really do give a **** about road safety, heres a Gasto.":rolleyes:

Andrewf20

I think that ultimately the frustration with speed cameras lies in the fact that they can be unfair - that doing 80mph thru a camera on a road with a speed limit of 75mph in good driving conditions may actually be safer than a hairy overtaking manouvre at 50mph on the same road. Ultimetly static speed cameras catch speeding, not necessarily dangerous driving. Sometimes speed limits are too fast!

ambro25

Head wrote:

What did i do to deserve a slap?

...Fixed:

ambro25 wrote:

(...)
oh, wait... [slaps forefront]they cost more and they gross less revenue [/slaps forefront], duh-me!

Edit: I've actually posted this a fair few times already, but it's worth re-iterating that, by way of example, in France wherein speeding used to be considered as entirely acceptable and normal for decades, and wherein changing people's mindsets and behaviours behind the wheel would expectedly take little less than a second Révolution, the situation has been turned on its head literally overnight (2 years, give or take) with a zero-tolerance approach and fairly harsh 'sentences' (points/suspended license/fines) to go with it. Message has been received by the masses loud and clear, and you'll be hard pressed to see anyone speeding over there these days, to the extent that a lot do here. (That said, you don't get done for being 55 km/h instead of 50, or 95 instead of 90 - that's another good use of "judgement").

Marcus.Aurelius

Pulling into the hard shoulder where it is quite large is a courtesy to other drivers. this "I've got the right to drive just like everyone else" is missing the point. You have the right to drive in whatever fashion you see fit. But you have a "duty" to drive with due care and consideration. I've worked with the Florida Highway Patrol years ago as a naturalised citizen and we would issue tickets where people were holding up cars behind. In our county the situation was that poor skilled drivers were not allowing faster traffic to overtake and we had a lot of accidents over a short time and we had to take some action.

I've no problem with people sticking to the limits, but it shouldn't be at the expense of other drivers. Your reason, sounds like vigilantism, commonly expressed by other "go slow" advocates. Trying to prevent others speeding by blocking their advancement is very ignorant. Be careful, I'd be the type of person that writes tickets for such behaviour if its blatant. I'm sure the Gardaí feel the same! What I saw in Fl and what they see here everyday is shocking. (in IRL, Ticket is Driving without reasonable consideration, 2 points & 4 on court, 80 euro fixed fine).

Sorry, but it is another factor in a lot of accidents I've attended. Speeding isn't to blame for all accidents, but discourteous driving by a third party has led to a lot of road rage and a lot of accidents. True, it is not your fault entirely, but you could prevent an accident by allowing others to pass.

Ronan H

maoleary wrote:

Pulling into the hard shoulder where it is quite large is a courtesy to other drivers. this "I've got the right to drive just like everyone else" is missing the point. You have the right to drive in whatever fashion you see fit. But you have a "duty" to drive with due care and consideration. I've worked with the Florida Highway Patrol years ago as a naturalised citizen and we would issue tickets where people were holding up cars behind. In our county the situation was that poor skilled drivers were not allowing faster traffic to overtake and we had a lot of accidents over a short time and we had to take some action.

I've no problem with people sticking to the limits, but it shouldn't be at the expense of other drivers. Your reason, sounds like vigilantism, commonly expressed by other "go slow" advocates. Trying to prevent others speeding by blocking their advancement is very ignorant. Be careful, I'd be the type of person that writes tickets for such behaviour if its blatant. I'm sure the Gardaí feel the same! What I saw in Fl and what they see here everyday is shocking. (in IRL, Ticket is Driving without reasonable consideration, 2 points & 4 on court, 80 euro fixed fine).

Sorry, but it is another factor in a lot of accidents I've attended. Speeding isn't to blame for all accidents, but discourteous driving by a third party has led to a lot of road rage and a lot of accidents. True, it is not your fault entirely, but you could prevent an accident by allowing others to pass.

I actually can not believe what im reading, you are labeling me (again) as a vigilante because i try to stay within the limits of the law, wheres the sense in that? Driving with due care and consideration is driving according to the law, within the speed limits. It absolutely makes NO sense to expect me to move into a hard shoulder (an area which you are not supposed to drive in unless you are broken down, need to use the phone etc...) just to facilitate others who want to drive above the speed limit. I am not trying to block other peoples advancement, im driving a the speed limit, im not trying to be a vigilante or anything else that you feel the need to label me. Again i have to ask, why i am the one being slammed just because i dont want to break the speed limits? I always drive with due care and consideration for other drivers, obviously your opinion of DC&C is different to mine, and thats fine, but labelling me as a vigilante, a go slow advocate and as a person who tried to stop others advancement is not fair. Again ill go back to peoples attitudes, if people didnt have this urge to speed and had a tiny bit of cop on and patience there wouldnt be a problem, but there is, and its people like me that are taking the flack for peoples bad attitudes to driving. And no doubt you will think i am one of those people with a bad attitude to driving after reading this too, but hey, i knew that would happen when i started this thread. It just doesnt make any sense...

Fuming Head :mad:

Marcus.Aurelius

Head wrote:

It absolutely makes NO sense to expect me to move into a hard shoulder just to facilitate others who want to drive above the speed limit.

Vigilante!

Seriously, pull over before you cause an accident.

Did you know that many drivers overtake so that they can see better ahead of them? Do you deny them the right to do this? Sounds like vigilantism! What if they don't feel safe behind you? Maybe you're not a very good driver and they'd rather get ahead so they won't need to worry about you! Also a lot of drivers know the accuracy of speedometers allows them to drive faster without actually breaking the limit in speed gun terms.

If it makes you feel better, the tickets I wrote were all upheld by the judge, and he often upped the fines and added some jail time for the really doddery ones. It worked, the accident rate dropped from that one simple rule, let others pass when you have room to comfortably do so. Are you that important and puffed up with delusions of adequacy that you can't understand the reasoning and let a few fellow drivers overtake?

Seriously Head, get over yourself.

Ronan H

maoleary wrote:

Vigilante!

Seriously, pull over before you cause an accident.

Did you know that many drivers overtake so that they can see better ahead of them? Do you deny them the right to do this? Sounds like vigilantism! What if they don't feel safe behind you? Maybe you're not a very good driver and they'd rather get ahead so they won't need to worry about you!Also a lot of drivers know the accuracy of speedometers allows them to drive faster without actually breaking the limit in speed gun terms.

If it makes you feel better, the tickets I wrote were all upheld by the judge, and he often upped the fines and added some jail time for the really doddery ones. It worked, the accident rate dropped from that one simple rule, let others pass when you have room to comfortably do so. Are you that important and puffed up with delusions of adequacy that you can't understand the reasoning and let a few fellow drivers overtake?

I overtake myself on occasion to get a clearer view ahead of me, particularly if in behind a truck, however, if the truck is already driving at the limit i dont bother, because im going at the highest speed possible anyway, so whats the point. As for your point about the accuracy of speedos, were back to the speed cameras again and away from driving attitudes. I guarantee you that if you came out as a passenger in my car you would agree that i am a safe driver in all areas of my driving (duh, obviously not if theres a queue of people behind me though :rolleyes:) so thats not an issue, thats not why people want to pass me believe me. No doubt because i am driving at the speed limit and they want to go faster they will "think" that im a bad driver holding up the whole road, but i am a safe driver and i definitely dont put people in danger with my driving.

I dunno why i bother wasting my time trying to drive in a reasonable manner. The roads are designed with areas suitable for passing and areas that are not suitable for passing, thats what the different white lines indicate, people just need to have a bit of patience and wait for them. If someone behind me is driving like a lunatic and putting me at risk then i will by all means pull in, but otherwise i dont see why i should, yeah theres a queue of cars behind me but thats life, the speed limit is there for a reason and if its a very low limit then theres obviously people around or its a built up area or theres roadworks etc... Life isnt that short that you have to rush everywhere, the speed limit will go back to normal a few miles up the road probably anyway.

Its clear we will continue to have differing opinions about this indefinitely so theres in point in to'ing and fro'ing all day. This is what Boards.ie is all about, discussion and difference of opinion, and so be it.

Fro'ing Head

PS: In relation to your "Pull over before you cause an accident..." comment, the above is a rare occurrence where theres someone busting to overtake me, generally people just wait until the speed limit increases or the road is bigger, its inly when nutcases are swerving, beeping and flashing me that theres an issue, and in cases like that i will pull in, as ive said numerous times already...

Head

Keith C

Head wrote:

I have a right to drive at the speed limit and if people behind me dont like that then thats not my problem. So when you say "let other cars pass", if you mean pulling into the hard shoulder then NO, unless they are being very wreckless and causing a danger to me,

Vigilantism.................

ambro25

maoleary wrote:

Did you know that many drivers overtake so that they can see better ahead of them? Do you deny them the right to do this? Sounds like vigilantism! What if they don't feel safe behind you? Maybe you're not a very good driver and they'd rather get ahead so they won't need to worry about you! Also a lot of drivers know the accuracy of speedometers allows them to drive faster without actually breaking the limit in speed gun terms.

:eek:

maleary, I've no compunctions in quite clearly stating that you are part of the problem, not of the solution.

Looks to me like you could do with a refresher. the OP has quite clearly stated his case in the context of driving at the speed limit, not at 60 kp/h in a 90 or 100 zone.

If a driver is obeying the speed limit, a following driver should leave a safety distance (anyone know what one these is, in Ireland? ) instead of 'having' to overtake to see better.

Overtaking is the choice of the following driver, who has a duty to the driver he/she follows - the followed driver's duty only extends to providing adequate warning of forthcoming manoeuver (e.g. indicate, and use brakes for braking lights instead of handbrake). Why do you think a collision between two cars driving in the same direction is always deemed to be the fault of the following driver?

What if every driver in a queue of 5 cars all want to be out front to see better ? You'll soon end up with a Canonball Run going 150 kp/h on an N road :rolleyes:

Making a case to the effect that people 'have' to pull over slightly or more into the reservation to be overtaken is very, very bad form. To begin with, the driver (sitting farthest from roadside) may not have a clear line of sight of the reservation over the next few hundreds of meters (bend, car in front, foliage, etc.). Next, the reservation may have bits and bobs over its surface which are difficult to assess at speed, but which could puncture or otherwise jeopardise the car tyres or worse. Finally, anything could happen during the manoeuver, i.e. whilst the car partially engaged on the reservation at 90 or 100 kp/h is sandwiched between the roadside and the overtaking car, which could result in a sideswipe or worse.

Put simply, overtaking should never be attempted if it requires the overtaken car to pull into the reservation, because it means the overtaking driver is either impeded in the oncoming lane, or unable to deport fully into the oncoming lane and complete the manoeuver in a tinmely fashion.

Honestly, maleary, what were you thinking of?

MrPudding

Head wrote:

are caught, thus hopefully getting across the message to more people... Speeding is speeding, as i have said a million times...

I have asked this question a few times on various threads without receiving an answer, perhaps you can answer it.

How do speed traps on a straight and safe peice of the N11 stop people in Donegal from speeding or from taking corners within the speed limit but at inappropriate speeds.

With regards to overtaking for a better view, i will always do it when safe to do so. Even if the vehicle in front is driving at the speed limit I would rather be in front so I have an unrestricted view and can choose my own lines without compromise. But then, I am on a bike so it is a bit easier.

MrP

C_Breeze

Op, its cool dont worry . Instead of moaning I went and bought myself a radar detector which works superbly, so I can speed all i want instead of moaning on threads and cauising you to loose you hair. Just please move out of the way if you see somebody coming up behind you very fast while ur dwadling along. Thanks

NeMiSiS

I would say 90% of the driving I see consists of drivers, driving round 40 - 45 MPH, and less, in convoys , not leaving enough room for people to overtake. When a driver tries to overtake, they generally bunch up, and will not facilitate an overtaking vehicle, these are the so called "safe" drivers.

The same drivers seem not to be able to negotiate any kind of bend, corner, or anything other than a straight road at 30 - 35 MPH (and less), jamming on their brakes right on top of the bend/corner, not accelerating out of it, taking poor/dangerous lines through, and being in an inappropriate gear. When they finally make it round in my opinion barely in control of their car, they accelerate and you are left stuck behind these convoys for another couple of miles, same drivers will accelerate while you overtake them. There is no way they could be in control with the severity of their braking, sometimes for seemingly random things, including oncoming traffic, even on wide roads. This to me is the average Irish driver, totally clueless, anticipating nothing whatsoever, and when someone decides they would rather have this kinda of crap behind them rather than in front they resent that. In fact most of the time, they seem unaware that you are even behind them until you overtake.

There is more reasons to overtake than to simply "go faster".

TK

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

maoleary wrote:

Vigilante!

Seriously, pull over before you cause an accident.

Did you know that many drivers overtake so that they can see better ahead of them? Do you deny them the right to do this?

What utter tripe. Are you seriously suggesting that only the car in front can see the road properly.? If that were the case we'd have an endless stream of overtaking and increasing speed as everyone tries to get in front (racing may be another word for it). Ever hear about leaving a safe distance between you and the car in front? This affords you an adequate view of the road ahead.

If a motorist is driving at the speed limit you cannot honestly expect him/her to pull over to let a speeding, and illegal, driver continue on their merry way.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

C_Breeze wrote:

Instead of moaning I went and bought myself a radar detector which works superbly, so I can speed all i want instead of moaning on threads and cauising you to loose you hair. Just please move out of the way if you see somebody coming up behind you very fast while ur dwadling along.

At first I thought you were serious and I was going to rant about the blatantly illegal nature of your activities...How you are the type of idiot who'll end up killing some innocent motorist or passanger or pedestrian someday...How I will certainly not move out of your way if I am driving at the legal limit for the area...And then I realised that you can't be that big a tosser and that you were using some kind of sarcastic humour to emphasis how ridiculous that kind of attitude would be. Well done I enjoyed the laugh:D